SEO

#1 (**permalink**) 04-18-2008, 08:56 AM

Susanne Ebrecht wrote:
> >>>>>> Is it too hard to rip it back out once the full row support
> >>>>>> arrives? That seems speculation at best anyway.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> That's what I was thinking. Glad someone else replied. ;-)
> >>>>>
> >>>> If you're looking for votes, +1. I'll gladly take a subset of the
> >>>> SQL standard UPDATE table SET (...) = (...) over having nothing.
> >>>>
> >>> +1 here, too.

> >>>
> >>>
> >> +1
> >>
> >
> > I am working now to get this into 8.2.
> >
> >
> I am glad to read this. But what does it mean to me? Shall I change the
> patch someway?

I have merged your patch into current CVS and applied it; attached.
There was quite a bit of code drift. One drift area was the new
RETURNING clause; that was easy to fix. A more complex case is the
code no longer has values as ResTargets --- it is a simple a_expr list,
so I changed the critical assignment in gram.y from:

res_col->val = (Node *)copyObject(res_val->val);

to:

res_col->val = (Node *)copyObject(res_val);

Hope that is OK. Without that fix, it crashed. I also merged your SGML
syntax and grammer addition into the exiting UPDATE main entry.

--
Bruce Momjian bruce@momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match

#2 (**permalink**) 04-18-2008, 08:58 AM

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Susanne Ebrecht wrote:
>
>>>>>>>> Is it too hard to rip it back out once the full row support
>>>>>>>> arrives? That seems speculation at best anyway.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's what I was thinking. Glad someone else replied. ;-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you're looking for votes, +1. I'll gladly take a subset of the
>>>>>> SQL standard UPDATE table SET (...) = (...) over having nothing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> +1 here, too.

>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I am working now to get this into 8.2.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> I am glad to read this. But what does it mean to me? Shall I change the
>> patch someway?
>>
>
> I have merged your patch into current CVS and applied it; attached.
> There was quite a bit of code drift. One drift area was the new
> RETURNING clause; that was easy to fix. A more complex case is the
> code no longer has values as ResTargets --- it is a simple a_expr list,
> so I changed the critical assignment in gram.y from:
>
> res_col->val = (Node *)copyObject(res_val->val);
>
> to:
>
> res_col->val = (Node *)copyObject(res_val);
>
> Hope that is OK. Without that fix, it crashed. I also merged your SGML
> syntax and grammer addition into the exiting UPDATE main entry.
>
Of course it is ok. Many thanks.

Susanne

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

SEO

Re: [HACKERS] extension for sql update